Company name doesn't have keyword: use domains instead?
-
Good Morning!
Now, I'll admit, I may be obsessing a little too much on this, and it may not make that big of an impact in the long run, but with Google being introduced to the world if I were to start a business today I would try and include my keyword into the title of my business. For example Dollar Shave Club, at least they got the word shave in there.
My business doesn't have a keyword in our name, is it beneficial to structure our URLs to include a keyword so that all of our URLs include that word? So if I sell organic bananas, but my company is called Evananas, is it worth it to have all domains become a child of Evananas.com/organic_bananas? That way at least we have the keyword "Organic Bananas" in our title?
So I could then have things like:
- evananas.com/organic_bananas/recipes
- evananas.com/organic_bananas/benefits
- evananas.com/organic_bananas/taste_really_freeking_good
Vs.
I'm not sure it makes a difference. The other problem is I want to keep our URL's as short as possible. I feel like less is always more, but I was always under the impression domain/URL based keywords were rather powerful. What is the best practice in this case?
Thanks Guys!
Evan(ana)
-
If those pages are getting traffic or have good links/referrals, then sure, redirect to the appropriate page.
What 'good' means really depends upon the vertical, but you know what pages get traffic and which are chaff.
Check your various link sources and site analytics.
Whatever doesn't make your cut, 410. Whatever makes the cut, 301 to a page with content relevant to the old page. Don't do a blanket (all old pages redirect to evananas.com) redirect. It's also a very good idea to consider responsive design, now that GWT is getting angry about improper mobile redirects.
-
Thank you both!
I would tend to agree with you about not rewriting my url's however we are redoing the website 100% and the website is in terrible shape. The previous seo guy tried to do what I am attempting to do, but to such a degree that a url would look like.
evananas.com/bannana/bannanas/organic/organic-bananas/recipes/cooking-at-home-with-bananas
literally.....
In that case would you consider doing a rewrite with a 301?
-
If this is an existing site, I would not change the URL structure just to include some keywords in there. The benefits of having a few keywords in the URL are outweighed by the risks. Even for a new site, shorter is typically better, like you said.
If you have a really large site with distinct categories, then having subdirectories makes sense. I would use dashes instead of underscores:
- evananas.com/organic-bananas/recipes
- evananas.com/non-organic-bananas/recipes
- evananas.com/plantains/recipes
Otherwise, just include the keywords in the page itself rather than creating a subdirectory just so your can have keywords in there:
-
You would do well to properly categorize your site. Yes, having a keyword in the URL is beneficial. There are ways to do that naturally, that make sense to search engines and people.
This would be a pretty good example of taxonomy:
evanorabilia.com/baseball-cards/houston-astros/nolan-ryan
I wouldn't recommend underscores in URLs. When The Googles is fairly transparent on something, I tend to cooperate.
So I would say you're likely fine. You can even go a little deeper. The search engine reason for flat architecture was due to crawling problems. As far as I know, they can easily handle deeper structure.
Though it may not be how you would like to handle navigation, you could do this:
Your nav might looks like this:
Home | Organic Bananas | Shop | Blog | Contact
-
Recipes
-
Smoothies
-
Pudding
If you simply must be 'flat', you can do this:
Your nav may look like this:
Home | Organic Bananas | Recipes | Benefits | Freeky Good | Blog | Shop | Contact
Personally, I like the taxonomy approach - but within reason. Both have their benefits, but I think the taxonomy approach gives you a little more room to grow.
Home | Organic Bananas | Organic Berries | Shop | Blog | Contact
-
Recipes
-
Smoothies
-
Pudding
Say you want to get into the organic berry market later?
-
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
I've screwed up. Domain pointers I forgot about. Think I am getting dinged by google.
Hey all. I setup some domain pointers for a client 8 years ago and now think they are hurting them. I am afraid google thinks it duplicate content. They are pointers so you can get to the same page using other domain names. Is my best approach to do a 301 redirect on them? The client is on a shared host so I have to use the web.config file. The site is pretty small so doing it for the 10+ pages is not that big of a deal. My question is this? When should I drop those pointers from the website altogether?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DougDeVore0 -
Incorrect Spelling Indexed In Meta Info - Can't Change It
Hi,It would be great if a member of the community could help me to resolve this issue.Google is indexing an incorrect spelling on of our key pages and we can't identify the reason why.- The page in question: https://newbridgesilverware.com/jewelleryAs you can see from the attached image, the Meta Title is rendered to contain the keyword "jewelry" (the American spelling.) We want this to read as "jewellery" - the British-English spelling. Yet in the page source the word is given in the meta title as "jewellery". Nowhere in the page source or on the page itself does the American spelling appear - yet Google still renders it in the Meta Title.Can anyone identify why this is happening and offer any possible solutions?Much appreciatedDhqJp
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Johnny_AppleSeed1 -
What is the fastest way disassociate an old URL with a new domain name?
We have a client with an old domain which was spammy (bad links). Until two months ago, it was forwarding to his current domain and (I believe) causing a penalty. Two months ago we transferred ownership of the spammy URL to a third party and setup an unrelated blog for Google to pick up on. Google did pick up on the URL. After two months Google Webmaster Tools is still showing 200 links from the old domain, to the new domain (from the spammy domain). Also, when you search the company name, the spammy domain still appears in the results (page two). Is there a faster way disassociate the old domain entirely from the business? I.e., just delete the domain, forward the domain to another website, etc.? If you have experience in this, I'd love to hear from you. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mgordon0 -
Domain name suffix impact on SEO
Hello there, We are about to launch a new website and were wondering what impact a specific suffix would have from an SEO point of view. We were thinking about going for a domain which ends in .london as oppose to .com We are based in London and sell world wide via our website. We are suggesting www.domain.london as oppose to www.domain.com I would appreciate your views... Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | roberthseo0 -
Is my text readable? I don't see it in the page source
Text on my site seems to be readable in a text only version (the page is not cached so I viewed it by disabling JAVA and then copy and pasted the page into Word) However, when I look in the page source I don't see the text there. The text was created using Open X html boxes to help us with formatting, but is this causing an SEO problem?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | theLotter0 -
Can use of the id attribute to anchor t text down a page cause page duplication issues?
I am producing a long glossary of terms and want to make it easier to jump down to various terms. I am using the<a id="anchor-text" ="" attribute="" so="" am="" appending="" #anchor-text="" to="" a="" url="" reach="" the="" correct="" spot<="" p=""></a> <a id="anchor-text" ="" attribute="" so="" am="" appending="" #anchor-text="" to="" a="" url="" reach="" the="" correct="" spot<="" p="">Does anyone know whether Google will pick this up as separate duplicate pages?</a> <a id="anchor-text" ="" attribute="" so="" am="" appending="" #anchor-text="" to="" a="" url="" reach="" the="" correct="" spot<="" p="">If so any ideas on what I can do? Apart from not do it to start with? I am thinking 301s won't work as I want the URL to work. And rel=canonical won't work as there is no actual page code to add it to. Many thanks for your help Wendy</a>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Chammy0 -
Is it ok to use both 301 redirect and rel="canonical' at the same time?
Hi everyone, I'm sorry if this has been asked before. I just wasn't able to find a response in previous questions. To fix the problems in our website regarding duplication I have the possibility to set up 301's and, at the same time, modify our CMS so that it automatically sets a rel="canonical" tag for every page that is generated. Would it be a problem to have both methods set up? Is it a problem to have a on a page that is redirecting to another one? Is it advisable to have a rel="canonical" tag on every single page? Thanks for reading!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SDLOnlineChannel0 -
Exact match domain names
Hello, Someone approached a client of mine to sell a exact match domain name for a very competitive and high converting keyword. Would this be of any use and what are the best tactics to employ if it is purchased? I was of the opinion that the 'power' of exact match domain names are dying fast but would be interested to hear what people with experience in this think and what they have done with them (i.e. set-up a website on that domain or re-directed it)? Thanks, Rikki
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RikkiD220